iPhone, iPad leading Android in mobile enterprise adoption

Enterprise mobile services vendor Good Technology reports iPhone 4 became the leading mobile device among its enterprise customers in the first month following its launch, with iPad helping Apple account for more than half of all its new enterprise device activations this summer.

Good provides push messaging, device management and security products for corporate mobile users, serving as an alternative to RIM's BlackBerry Enterprise Server. As such, Good supports mobile platforms outside of RIM's own, including Microsoft's Windows Mobile, Symbian, and adding relatively new support for iPhone and Android in December of 2009.

"As the leader in multi-platform enterprise mobility, security, and management," the report said, "Good has a clear view into enterprise adoption and support of mobile devices. Thousands of customers across every major industry and more than 40 of the Fortune 100 use Good Technology for enterprise mobility."

From May through September of last year, Good reported that Apple's iOS platform accounted for more than 50 percent of net new activations, followed by Android with nearly 30 percent, Windows Mobile with 15 percent, and Symbian devices representing less than five percent.

Apple's dominant standing in mobile enterprise adoption is particularly noteworthy because the iPhone was only available via AT&T in the US. With Verizon joining Apple as a US carrier, business adoption of the iPhone may begin to grow even faster.

iOS Good's most popular mobile platform in the enterprise

The report clarified that, "since RIM devices use only the BlackBerry Enterprise Server for corporate email access, Good does not have insight into BlackBerry handset activation trends and they are not reflected in this report."

Apple's iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 3G, and iPad accounted for the top four new device activations for the May through September period, followed by the Android-based Motorola's Droid X and Droid 2 and HTC Droid Incredible, and the Windows Mobile using HTC Cedar, Samsung 1637 and BlackJack 2.

In addition to Apple's iPhone and iPad, Good noted that it supports over 30 Android device models and over 100 mobile devices using Windows Mobile. "More than 40 percent of Goods customers support both iOS and Android devices, and nearly 20 percent support devices on three or more mobile platforms," the company said.

Good noted that the iPad entered its top five device list in less than two months after first becoming available. "Interestingly," the company observed, "70 percent of these iPad users have not activated any other devices with Good, while 30 percent have activated both an iPad and least one other iOS or Android device.

Android growth stalls in June, Apple retains clear lead

Good noted that adoption of iOS peaked in May, when Apple's platform accounted for 60 percent of all new activations. Android grew rapidly in June, peaking at 36 percent of new enterprise activations. However, since then Android has slipped back down below 30 percent as Apple has stabilized at a 56 percent share of activations.

The dual punch of Apple's iPad and iPhone 4 launches this summer appear to have blunted the grown of Android in the enterprise, mirroring a similar phenomenon witnessed in Verizon's weakening Android device sales over the same period. While Good doesn't count RIM's BlackBerry platform, Verizon's rapidly collapsing sales of BlackBerry models may provide some context for its relative standing in business as well.

Microsoft's mobile platform continues to shrink, although the report notes, "we dont expect to see Windows Mobile devices vanish from the rankings in the foreseeable future, due to their continued use by government and other enterprises that have invested in ruggedized or other 'purpose-built' Windows Mobile devices to support retail, field service, logistics, and transportation applications.

"Symbian remains fairly steady, but is less than 5 percent of all net activations, driven primarily by Goods European customer base."

Are we sure this is a good thing? The kind of enterprise features that devices get when they sell well to business are the same kind of features that give the everyday consumer the sh*ts. If you want to make a great product you have to chose one market or the other (though a merely good product can be successful in both).

Are we sure this is a good thing? The kind of enterprise features that devices get when they sell well to business are the same kind of features that give the everyday consumer the sh*ts. If you want to make a great product you have to chose one market or the other (though a merely good product can be successful in both).

How did you conclude that the iPhone features are a pain for users considering the tens of millions of iPhones sold all over the globe to happy consumers?

Oh wait... you must mean the very small, vocal, tech-head minority that feel the need to access every conceivable type of system resource on their phone and micro-manage it, without taking into consideration Apple's successful reasoning to hide all that complexity from those tens of millions of consumers?

Face it. That same simplicity and closed environment is what also makes the iPhone desirable for the enterprise as well. Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.

The buzzword is:- "consumerization of the enterprise". iOS is the users choice, and enterprise is being forced to follow. And who said more productive and creative employees weren't good for business?

Here is a great example of iOS in the enterprise: http://www.apple.com/ipad/business/profiles/ge/ and you can see other corporations not wanting to be left behind, because competing against others with those lethal weapons in their hands would be deadly.

Windows and RIM are looking like they are from the dark ages, and Android is being seen as a muddled mess, with geeks leading a charge into a black hole of problems and big costs.

One thing I've always wondered. Why does the Android logo look like a robot? Androids are supposed to look like humans, not robots, George Lucas's droids notwithstanding.

C3P0 is an Android, right? with humanlike form if not surface color and texture.

R2D2 is a Robot - actually an Astromech.

But in that world just as in ours - terms like Xerox and Kleenex and Q-tip take on a common usage that is larger than the literal meaning - so "droid" in the world of StarWars is slang covering both robots and androids.

And don't forget Cyborgs - and is there a cut off - Luke with his mechanical hand for example - is he a cyborg? part human part machine.

on a separate note - whenever I see Symbian it makes me think of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybian and then I am thinking that maybe if the two companies got together for some shared promotional and marketing efforts they would both benefit.

Are we sure this is a good thing? The kind of enterprise features that devices get when they sell well to business are the same kind of features that give the everyday consumer the sh*ts. If you want to make a great product you have to chose one market or the other (though a merely good product can be successful in both).

1995 ended a LONG time ago. In 2011 people don't want a handful of business devices and another handful of personal devices. They want one phone and one laptop and or tablet. If Apple products cant be used at work, they will be unable to compete for a huge segment of the consumer market as well. I think the guys running Apple know what they are doing.

One thing I've always wondered. Why does the Android logo look like a robot? Androids are supposed to look like humans, not robots, George Lucas's droids notwithstanding.

It walks on two legs, has two arms, two forward facing eyes. As far as potential forms for robots, their logo guy has a lot of human features. Enough to call him an android in my opinion, but, then again, I think LTE delivering 20mb downloads is good enough to be called 4G.

Oh wait... you must mean the very small, vocal, tech-head minority that feel the need to access every conceivable type of system resource on their phone and micro-manage it, without taking into consideration Apple's successful reasoning to hide all that complexity from those tens of millions of consumers?

Nope, can't be tech-heads, at least not real ones. We simply jailbreak our iPhones and have access to every conceivable type of system resource on our phones. At least as much or more than most Android phones, an certainly more than any RIM or Windows products. Heck, the ability to tinker with the UNIX OS was half the reason I bought my first iPhone.

He must mean the vocal pseudo tech head wannabes who think they know a lot more than they do, or perhaps the geeks who hate Apple because they hate anything popular with the non-socially challenged crowd.

... Good supports mobile platforms outside of RIM's own, including Microsoft's Windows Mobile, Symbian, and adding relatively new support for iPhone and Android in December of 2009.

...

The report clarified that, "since RIM devices use only the BlackBerry Enterprise Server for corporate email access, Good does not have insight into BlackBerry handset activation trends and they are not reflected in this report."

Seemingly, the take away point is that if we ignore the true market leader, we can pretend that Apple is the market leader.

Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.

Have folks not learned enough from the Windows mess?

What you describe is the exact same situation that the enterprise faces with Macs. You can load any app / malware on it without going through the App store.

Is that why enterprise has overwhelmingly rejected the Mac? I always thought the reasons were different.

They want one phone and one laptop and or tablet. If Apple products cant be used at work, they will be unable to compete for a huge segment of the consumer market as well. I think the guys running Apple know what they are doing.

I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.

However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.

IOW, if people truly want one phone and one tablet, the solution apple offers is totally inadequate.

Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.

Just look at a list of the Fortune 500. This article tells us that they all mostly use the iPhone.

But most of them actually use the Blackberry. Go figure.

Saying that most (or all or some fraction of) Fortune 500 companies use the iPhone - is not the same as saying that the iPhone is the predominant smart phone used by a majority of users at all of those companies.

Saying that most Fortune 500 companies use - or support - the iPhone *could* be interpreted to mean a corporate decision was made and the iPhone chosen as the preferred device - etc - but again without numbers or even percentages - that is not mutually exclusive with also saying that RIM devices are also used by a majority of Fortune 500 companies.

I don't think my company has an official statement or support policy regarding device - it is left to the individual and there are many who have iPhones - at least half my team - and at least half the sales reps we support have iOS devices of one or multiple type.

How did you conclude that the iPhone features are a pain for users considering the tens of millions of iPhones sold all over the globe to happy consumers?

Oh wait... you must mean the very small, vocal, tech-head minority that feel the need to access every conceivable type of system resource on their phone and micro-manage it, without taking into consideration Apple's successful reasoning to hide all that complexity from those tens of millions of consumers?

Face it. That same simplicity and closed environment is what also makes the iPhone desirable for the enterprise as well. Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.

Have folks not learned enough from the Windows mess?

Amen to that.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Nope, can't be tech-heads, at least not real ones. We simply jailbreak our iPhones and have access to every conceivable type of system resource on our phones. At least as much or more than most Android phones, an certainly more than any RIM or Windows products. Heck, the ability to tinker with the UNIX OS was half the reason I bought my first iPhone.

He must mean the vocal pseudo tech head wannabes who think they know a lot more than they do, or perhaps the geeks who hate Apple because they hate anything popular with the non-socially challenged crowd.

The reason they hate iPhone is that they are not into the level of technical understanding it takes to program Unix, no to mention C++, and having to understand interface spec's. Their level of understanding is finding some box to tick off after moving 15 levels down in the menus.

I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.

However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.

IOW, if people truly want one phone and one tablet, the solution apple offers is totally inadequate.

Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.

I'm not sure if you have used an iPhone/iPad combo but you can definitely sync contacts, email etc. Ota with either MobileMe or active sync (or other type services). As for backups, that must be done with the computer used to activate it which enterprise would like because back ups are more easily regulated. Lastly, enterprise functionality is limited by the imagination of the company since it can create and deploy custom apps for their own specific needs fairly easily.

What you describe is the exact same situation that the enterprise faces with Macs. You can load any app / malware on it without going through the App store.

Is that why enterprise has overwhelmingly rejected the Mac? I always thought the reasons were different.

Enterprise didn't really adopt Mac because they mostly have a legacy installation of PC software and infrastructure. Moving away from it would represent a huge reinvestment effort.

Adoption of iPHone, iPad into enterprise doesn't have this problem because most enterprises didn't have such an infrastructure in place. They are free to choose whichever technology people prefer and offers most compelling business case.

I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.

However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.

IOW, if people truly want one phone and one tablet, the solution apple offers is totally inadequate.

Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.

you should check out MobileMe service for syncing emails, contacts, calendars, bookmarks, notes...

Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.

The cool thing is, you can load any app/malware on it! Apple doesn't like the fact that people have been doing this, but there are many happy Jailbroke iPhone users out there. It does let them micro manage their applications, run rogue programs, etc.

But those of us that actually need to trust their phones... just play nice with the (rather reasonable) restrictions.

I'm not so sure about your premises. You say that people want one phone and one ... tablet. You use that to conclude that Apple's solution makes sense for the enterprise.

No he means folks don't want to carry a BB and an iPhone and a iPad and a Playbook. So Apple needs a useable enterprise solution comparable to BES. The closest thing is Good for Enterprise. In my limited exposure it seems a bit slow and clunky compared to the BB but from a security standpoint it is adequate vs BES.

Quote:

However, using an iPhone and iPad combo leaves you vulnerable because you are unable to back up either one using the other. Additionally, if you add a contact to one (for example), you are unable to sync it to the other.

What? My iphone and ipad have the same contact and other info on it and is sync'd automagically.

Quote:

Instead, I think that Apple sees the tablet a a causal media consumption device for consumers, and not as a desktop replacement for the Fortune 500. The lack of enterprise functionality and security pretty much relegates the iPad (for the most part) to the consumer market.

This is false given that Good is seeing penetration in the enterprise because folks want the iPhone and Android over the BB. Good provides the enterprise level of security for data on smartphones. All the corporate data is encrypted and accessible only via the Good app. The profile can be set to wipe based on policy (like detection of jailbreak) and the devices can all be administered over the air by IT.

You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers.

The reason they hate iPhone is that they are not into the level of technical understanding it takes to program Unix, no to mention C++, and having to understand interface spec's. Their level of understanding is finding some box to tick off after moving 15 levels down in the menus.

Your my new hero, I have been trying to find the way to explain the difference, and this is it.

First basing your information on "Good" is a total joke. Good makes mobile support software thats not required for most phones.

Example we have Exchange 2010 at work, and we use the Exchange tools to manage our mobile devices. We did the same for Exchange 2003.

The key is if a devices supports the Active Sync protocol and how much of it does the device support. The iPhone was a NO GO in the corporate world until Apple licensed AS from Microsoft. Corporate email is 70+% MS Exchange. AS = forced policies, like passwords, screen locks, and other stuff like remote wipe.

Good comes into play if your device does not support or fully support AS. Verizon tried very hard to get us to move to them and the Droid when it first came out. We tested it and it did not fully work with Exchange, so they tried to get us to use Good software to fill in the gaps. We did not want to purchase and setup another system to manage mobile devices, so we moved from Sprint to ATT for corporate mobile phones. The iPhone and Windows phones are the choices users have at my work place.

As of Adroid 2.2 or better I have read that Google fully supports AS.....and no need for Good.

I dont know any of my friends that support Exchange/mobile access at their work places that use Good.

My point being this Data is useless.....unless of course the data looks good for Apple and DED is the blog author.

No he means folks don't want to carry a BB and an iPhone and a iPad and a Playbook. So Apple needs a useable enterprise solution comparable to BES. The closest thing is Good for Enterprise. In my limited exposure it seems a bit slow and clunky compared to the BB but from a security standpoint it is adequate vs BES.

What? My iphone and ipad have the same contact and other info on it and is sync'd automagically.

This is false given that Good is seeing penetration in the enterprise because folks want the iPhone and Android over the BB. Good provides the enterprise level of security for data on smartphones. All the corporate data is encrypted and accessible only via the Good app. The profile can be set to wipe based on policy (like detection of jailbreak) and the devices can all be administered over the air by IT.

You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers.

"You don't buy Good at all unless you're moving away from BES so all of it's customers are enterprise customers."

How did you conclude that the iPhone features are a pain for users considering the tens of millions of iPhones sold all over the globe to happy consumers?

Oh wait... you must mean the very small, vocal, tech-head minority that feel the need to access every conceivable type of system resource on their phone and micro-manage it, without taking into consideration Apple's successful reasoning to hide all that complexity from those tens of millions of consumers?

Face it. That same simplicity and closed environment is what also makes the iPhone desirable for the enterprise as well. Since you can't load any app / malware on it unless it's through the App store (public or custom enterprise app), it's a great way to ensure better security and stability than the wild-west Android free-for-all.

Have folks not learned enough from the Windows mess?

Old WinMob phones had options that could be forced on them via the exchange server such as requiring a password and encryption on the device. Other options, such as preventing installation of software I'm not sure.

In any case, a good IT staff is always necessary for any platform to ensure its operation, especially its security. The users just need their device to work, and I can tell you from first hand experience that winmob 5 sucked balls on how well it worked with exchange over the air.

While it isn't apparent to consumers because of carrier subsidies, the wholesale price of an iPhone, at about $600, is $100-$150 more than the typical high-end Android device, estimates Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Pierre Ferragu. That makes it less crippling for carriers to offer low-priced deals on Android phones, such as "buy one, get one free."

hi-mobile.net wants $960 for an iphone4 16GB model, with no warranty. That's around twice as much as any other phone.

Good has jumped through most of the hoops on the certifications for security configuration and cryptography ( FIPS-140-2, Common Criteria is in progress, and a bunch of others already done ).

Their system architecture is very similar to Blackberry, its just that the end "device" is an encrypted app container running on a range of phones, rather than the whole phone itself. Good and RIM had a series of legal disputes over patents in the last 10 years on the messaging solution, and by and large Good won those.

The main negatives of the Good approach and implementation are :

- it doesn't manage the device, it manages the app
- it has no visibility or reporting on the device as a whole
- all its encryption is a software implementation, and it does not leverage the hardware crypto in an iOS device, so its painfully slow with large mailboxes
- the app effectively replaces the functionality of the built in mail, contact, calendar, web browser, vpn and document viewer for all corporate usage, and Good's not done as good a job with these as Apple has, and they are deliberately sandboxed and not integrated into the whole OS like the Apple provided apps

So great from a cross platform device security perspective, great for ticking boxes in security policy compliance, not as good as iOS natively for usability, and reasonably expensive by iOS standards.

With AS and native mail/contact/calendars, if I unlock the device and hand it to you to show you a game, you can also open and read my email app. With the built in mail, I can cut and paste a work email into my GMail or Mobile Me and send it by the other method.

With Good, I need a second authentication with a different password to get into the app, so you wouldn't be able to see my mail, contacts or calendars, and the server side policy can out cut and paste out of the app, and prevent me forwarding work emails on my personal accounts.

So its really a corporate messaging solution thats secure, and kept separate from everything else on the device - kind of like carrying a separate device, its just a virtual one.

The joke is they must be an honest company, because they didn't call themselves "Great Technology". Most of the PITA performance stuff they'd fix on iOS if they leverages the hardware crypto module rather than doing everything slowly in software.